Jump to content

Destiny31's Corner

  • entries
    28
  • comments
    230
  • views
    4,546

What Are You Doing? Chapter 8: What are you teaching?, Part 1


Destiny

1,581 views

Disclaimer: this chapter is all boring walls of text. I'll do my best to make it interesting, but I may not be successful.

Wine: naw, it would just make me fall asleep, cos this shit is boring.

We have another new character today! Captain Courtship, the youth pastor at Good Girl and Barren Spinster's church. Um, Barren Spinster is 32. Why does she have a youth pastor? Maybe I need some wine after all. Artist's rendition:

Spoiler

Charles.png.2e6d88f1b45af603acfa039d38a32bfa.png

Back in the god damned park. I may end up becoming a full on hater of nature by the end of this clusterfuck of fail. Incidentally, the chapter illustration is a high rise. One might wonder what a high rise has to do with a park, but one would never get an answer, so moving the fuck on. Nosy Busybody is chillin' in the park and OMFG DO THESE PEOPLE HAVE JOBS? WHY IS EVERYONE IN THE PARK ALL DAY LONG? Captain Courtship is also in the park today BECAUSE REASONS AND COS FUCK ME THAT'S WHY, so he wanders over to Nosy Busybody and asks if they can talk. Captain Courtship wants to set the record straight on what courtship really means, because he feels like Good Girl and Barren Spinster did a bad job of it. Spoiler: this explanation goes on for FIFTEEN fucking pages. SEND HELP! (this is totally why this chapter has taken so long, cos it's too damned long and I'm scared.)

Quote

Sakal: Oh? I thought they did a rather good job, between them. It was rather awkward for them, obviously.

Charles: Yes, you’re right. It is awkward for them. They aren’t really trained in those things.

Sakal: Those things?

Charles: Well, theology, and youth ministry.

Sakal: I see. I had thought maybe you meant in Bible study and doctrine.

Charles: Yes, that’s what I meant by ‘theology’.

Nosy Busybody, you arrogant motherfucker. I hate you and your condescending ass. That's what fucking theology means, you steaming pile of shit. This was the point were I took a 20 minute detour to try to determine if Mr. Ohlman (who is a creeper) has a college education, but I was unsuccessful at doing so. I assume that he must have some sort of secondary education if he worked as a schoolteacher, but I could find nothing that says that he has a college degree. Not that I think having a degree matters all that much, but this quote definitely seems to hate on people with educations. This guy. This fucking guy. HATE.

Anyway, Captain Courtship gives the boring courtship is godly and keeps you from giving away pieces of your heart speech, and I'm just going to skip it, because, if you are on FJ, you have heard it all before and because I have blood pressure to consider. Nosy Busybody retorts that courtship really doesn't seem all that dissimilar from dating, because there are serial courters in the world. I don't entirely disagree with Nosy Busybody on this issue, but I also think the whole courtship movement is FUCKING HORSESHIT and that getting your heart broken a time or two is part of growing up. It's a shitty part, but learning what DOESN'T work for you in a relation ship helps you learn what DOES.

Nosy Busybody starts in on his spiel about how the bible doesn't say that people who marry should be able to support themselves or that they should be mature enough to make a life altering decision and omfg, I want to punch him. It breaks my heart to think of the kids this asshole has harmed. Captain Courtship and Nosy Busybody go back and forth for a while on whether courtship is Biblical, and it's boring and stupid and send help and wine!

Quote

Sakal: Let me see if I can explain it in terms you are used to. The same author you quoted earlier, said there are five fundamental principles to what he calls ‘Scriptural romance’: piety, patriarchy, purity, preparedness and patience.lx (Footnote is a link to http://itwillpass.com/family_dating.shtml.)

God, hes' being condescending again, and I want to reach through the screen and throttle him. So fucking badly. Apparently we are going to go through all five of these points and Nosy Busybody is going to explain to us how courtship does NOT serve these goals. (Personally, I think anything that doesn't serve the goal of more patriarchy is a win, but I'm a godless heathen so what the fuck do I know?)

I'm just gonna summarise the five points, because this goes on for PAGES. Piety: courtship can't be pious because there's no one who gets married via courtship in the Bible? Uh, what the actual fuck does that have to do with piety? I don't think that word means what he thinks it means. Go get the fortifying beverage of your choice before you start the next one. I did. For the record, I now have a cider next to me while I'm writing this because this one made me angry. Patriarchy: courtship allows the children to make choices with the parent's approval. The Bible doesn't talk about that.  The Bible has the parents telling the children what to do and they just do it. *vomits* Purity: the tl;dr of this argument is that Paul said it is better to marry than burn, so let's marry them off so they don't have bad thoughts about teh ebil secks. Preparedness: basically, it's they've reached sexual awakening, so they should get married and go start popping out babies. Patience: a good thing, but should not be confused with delay. The whole section was a word salad that made no sense to me.

They go back and forth on whether Rebekah consented to the marriage with Isaac for like 2 pages. Captain Courtship is team Rebekah gave consent to marrying Isaac because there is a Bible verse where she says "I will go". Nosy Busybody tries to make the case that her consent was demanded because her father had already made the agreement. Here's what it says, because it makes me too angry:

Quote

Sakal: Exactly, so what does that do to Calvin’s argument here? Read Bethuel’s statement again, and see how much he qualifies it. Does he say, ‘If Rebecca agrees’? Does he even imply it?

Charles: Well, no, not really. It is a very strong statement. But no doubt they made strong statements in those days.

Sakal: And no doubt they meant them too. Come, you studied those cultures in seminary. How likely is it that an oriental man of his type would have really meant,”...if my daughter agrees” when taking a vow?

Charles: Well. Not very likely. Then why did they ask her?

Sakal: Gill, who still wants to find some ‘consent’ from Rebecca, says of verse fifty eight: “the question was not about her marriage of Isaac, that was agreed upon, and she had doubtless given her consent, and which she tacitly did by accepting of the presents, but about taking the journey immediately:lxxv” She had already been given to Isaac; they were having an argument about when exactly she should leave. Her mother wanted her to stay for a few days of ‘goodbyes’, and Abraham’s servant, the impatient one, wanted them to leave immediately.

Leaving out the oriental bit, which is terrible for its own reasons, WHAT THE SHIT FUCK?????????????????? This guy is fucking evil.

Moving on, we are going to go through Nosy Busybody's five principles for how to make a successful marriage. I am going to go through these tomorrow, or later tonight, because Luna should be here soon, and I don't want to be angry when she gets here. Part 2, coming soon.

  • Upvote 8

9 Comments


Recommended Comments

CTRLZero

Posted (edited)

I checked out the itwillpass.com website, which describes itself as "Australian website liberating [fellow Aussies] from the occultic tripod of fear, ignorance and superstition."  Really!  If you want to exercise your eyerolls, this is the site for you!  Nothing new here, but conveniently concentrated in one easy-to-snark website.

The real meaning behind "it will pass" is contained in the Health tab's offering of liver and gallstone info.  Studies confirm that no one has died of using vitamins, etc.  Pyramid schemes galore and connections, of course, to Answers in Genesis. 

:5624797b0697e_headbash:

Quote from itwillpass.com:  " Do you resent the thought of your father initiating, investigating, choosing, and overseeing your romantic relationship? Instead do you want control, "freedom," and privacy in your relationship?"

Putting freedom in quotes makes my head hurt.

Edited by CTRLZero
  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Destiny

Posted

I didn't look too carefully cos no time for a rabbit hole today. It looks like a gold mine of crazy though. 

I'm only half way through that clusterfuck of a chapter. 

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
WhatWouldJohnCrichtonDo?

Posted (edited)

I tried checking out itwillpass.com but all I could see from the home page was the home page. Anything I clicked on sent me right back to the home page. :pb_rollseyes: The home page with the wonderful quote, "This to [sic] shall pass."

I did get to the "courtship is better than dating" page by using @Destiny's link above. I loved this part:

"Unrealistic standards of comparison.

It's not uncommon, after the newness of marriage wears off, that marriage partners find themselves discontented with each other. Often, then, they will mentally compare their spouse to someone they knew in the past. Men sometimes think thoughts like this: "She doesn't cook like so and so; she isn't as pretty as so and so." And women are tempted to think thoughts like: "He isn't as sensitive as so and so was; he just doesn't listen to me the way so and so did; maybe I should have married so and so - he never made me feel so cherished." If we had never been intimate with so many "so and so's" we wouldn't have such extensive standards for finding fault with our mate but would find greater contentment in marriage."(my bold)

So, discontentment in marriage is caused by having higher standards? We shouldn't set "extensive standards" for our spouses; we would be happier if we were ignorant? If only I had just settled for the first man I ever kissed!

image.jpg

Edited by WhatWouldJohnCrichtonDo?
  • Upvote 4
Link to comment
HerNameIsBuffy

Posted

If her consent is not required I need them to clearly explain how this is different than selling her into sexual slavery which is a fucking crime.  It's not just not stressing consent, it's addressing it to specifically point out that it's not required that makes me want the police to interview every woman and girl with whom they've ever had contact.

im rereading these thinking the second time I'd be less angry but I'm viscerally furious that people like this exist and as you put it so beautifully before - some kid is being harmed by this right now.

and apropos of nothing but the illustration looks so much like one of my old gynecologists that I did a spit take.

  • Upvote 5
Link to comment
Destiny

Posted

8 minutes ago, HerNameIsBuffy said:

If her consent is not required I need them to clearly explain how this is different than selling her into sexual slavery which is a fucking crime.  It's not just not stressing consent, it's addressing it to specifically point out that it's not required that makes me want the police to interview every woman and girl with whom they've ever had contact.

It's fucking not, and given that the girl that Vaughn Ohlman (who is a creeper) bought for his son was underage, I'd love to have that happen too.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
uber frau

Posted

Actually, I think that article is incorrect.  Laura wrote somewhere that she was 19 when she was 'betrothed' and 20 when she was married.

Vyckie is just being Vyckie. She's grabbed an angle without actually checking the facts and running with it regardless. (In this instance, she doesn't seem to have realised that the ppl often forget to update the header/'about me' section on their blogs and social media accounts.)  But then, little things like facts don't matter to her.  It doesn't matter if what she says helps or hinders whatever other ppl are trying to do, what matters is that someone is looking at Vyckie.  Anything to catch the wave of attention and direct some of it her way.   

 

 

  

 

 

 

Link to comment
Destiny

Posted

14 minutes ago, uber frau said:

Actually, I think that article is incorrect.  Laura wrote somewhere that she was 19 when she was 'betrothed' and 20 when she was married.

Vyckie is just being Vyckie. She's grabbed an angle without actually checking the facts and running with it regardless. (In this instance, she doesn't seem to have realised that the ppl often forget to update the header/'about me' section on their blogs and social media accounts.)  But then, little things like facts don't matter to her.  It doesn't matter if what she says helps or hinders whatever other ppl are trying to do, what matters is that someone is looking at Vyckie.  Anything to catch the wave of attention and direct some of it her way.

Possibly because V is a special snowflake. That said, I found the bit about her being underage elsewhere last week, and it was based on a comment on the now deleted blog where she gave her age as 19 then, while having a kid or two. There was some guesswork in the article on if she was 15 or 16 at the time of the marriage. I can't remember where I found that now, so I can't remember for certain if there was a direct quote in the article or not.

Link to comment
uber frau

Posted (edited)

I can't work out how to do a quote box thingy on a mobile phone but this is part of a response to a comment on her blog http://www.princecharmingdiapers.com/betrothal-story-joshua-laura/

It's dated 14th April 2016.

 

" Hello Ruth,
Thank you for commenting! I was 20 when we got married, 19 when we got betrothed."

Ppl like V annoy me because they discredit and distract from the real issues. VOhlman is an incredibly fucked up individual but the fact that he's personally organised underage marriages is not a charge that will stand up.

 

 

Edited by uber frau
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Posts

    • JermajestyDuggar

      Posted

      7 minutes ago, Caroline said:

      My apologies to all who love MCM furniture. But I think this piece is super ugly. It reminds me of my parents' 50's furniture. I even disliked our furniture then. 

       

      This particular MCM piece is not my favorite. But there are other MCM pieces I love. 

    • Caroline

      Posted

      My apologies to all who love MCM furniture. But I think this piece is super ugly. It reminds me of my parents' 50's furniture. I even disliked our furniture then. 

       

    • Antimony

      Posted

      A little aside, but one thing I've wondered about since Josh's case is, well, the muck behind Covenant Eyes.

      CE takes screenshots of any activity that it deems "suspicious"* and then blurs them (in a way they claim cannot be unblurred, but I'm doubtful). In any case, it appears they do this to protect the "monitoring allies" from seeing all the porn their husbands are watching or whatever, but. 

      But. This means that CE has to put that screenshot in its database, blur (and then encrypt it, they claim), and store it somewhere for the report for the accountability ally user. Which is...okay. But I've always wondered, does this mean there is actually a database that includes CSAM sitting on the CE servers? 

      They seem to allude to this being a possibility in their End User Agreement.

      Quote

      11. Agreement to comply with laws and restrictions on harmful transmissions. You, as the User, agree that you will comply with all applicable laws regarding computing device use, both now and in the future as laws are generated which may affect use of the computing device. You also agree not to attempt to pursue in any way any transmission of information to Covenant Eyes servers or other equipment which could be harmful to its database or other functions. The transmission of any material in violation of any state or United States regulations is expressly prohibited, and will result in immediate termination of use.

      I don't think we'll ever see this kind of thing in court (in any capacity) but it has struck me as strange since Josh's case that this private company is distributing (blurred) screenshots of unknown material and is also designed specifically to store all these images into their own databases and how do you even...legally manage such a database and...? And how do they know that content is illegal? Are they monitoring it to just terminate it and...? Not report? Do they have any (legal) duty to report? I don't think so. Do they have any ability to report this? (They will give over your info when requests by a court, but that's standard.)

      It's such a strange app to me and its always seemed like you could get a big can of worms about it when it comes to cases like Josh. 

      *Tumblr, a few years ago, used a similar early AI to detect "adult" content but ended up banning a lot of pictures of sand dunes because if you are a robot, the curves of a sand dune look roughly the same as those of a pale-to-tan naked lady because...that's a robot and it doesn't know. 

    • JermajestyDuggar

      Posted

      The math says she paid like $500 for this. She thinks she got a great deal. But she didn’t need it in the first place! She had a different one that used to be in her dining room. It wasn’t damaged in the “flood.” So why did she need to spend $500 for this new one? Because she has a shopping problem that she would never admit. 

      0352F43C-39F1-4563-88E7-EBA2AFE911DC.jpeg

      • Upvote 1
      • I Agree 1
    • Giraffe

      Posted

      1 hour ago, Four is Enough said:

      Did she though? did she even turn the computer on? My guess is that Submissive Wife believed in his innocence and never checked.

      That's always been my assumption. When I was still fundy I dated someone who, like me, was in church leadership. Once we started dating I would be so anxious about bringing ministry-related things up to him in public because of my anxiety surrounding things like "how will this look due to us dating? Will it seem like I'm challenging his authority?" It was quite the mindf*! So yes, I'd be shocked if Anna actually did anything with any emails she received. 



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.